Posted on 06/14/2024 9:49:13 AM PDT by RandFan
Justice Samuel Alito on Friday asserted that Congress could amend the law to successfully ban bump stocks in an opinion concurring with the Supreme Court’s decision Friday to invalidate a Trump-era ban on the devices.
The ban on bump stocks, which allow semi-automatic weapons to fire hundreds of rounds per minute, was implemented by the Trump administration in the wake of the 2017 Las Vegas mass shooting, where a shooter used a bump stock to kill a total of 60 people and wound hundreds of others — the deadliest mass shooting in U.S. history.
The Biden administration later defended the regulation, which was challenged in 2019, before the high court. Both administrations made possessing the devices a criminal offense by newly classifying them as machine guns under long-standing federal law.
Alito, in his opinion, wrote that he agreed the ban should be lifted “because there is simply no other way to read the statutory language.” However, he acknowledged that the Congress that passed the law banning machine guns in 1934 would not have seen “any material difference” between a machine gun and a semiautomatic rifle equipped with a bump stock.
(Excerpt) Read more at thehill.com ...
He’s merely deflecting criticism. I don’t blame him. He is correct because if Congress has solved all of our problems and are looking for something to do, they can address this very pressing issue plaguing our nation. I can barely sleep at night worrying about bump stocks.
Yeah, it doesn’t give me confidence he’d rule the entire NFA unconstitutional.
Because he knows Chevron is done and laws such as these, once again, will have to be made by the people who answer to their master, the citizens of the USA!!
Congress gonna have to get back to work.
“Because he knows Chevron is done and laws such as these, once again, will have to be made by the people who answer to their master, the citizens of the USA!!
Congress gonna have to get back to work.”
I’m picking up the same vibes. I can’t believe the Court would rule this way on the bump stock ban with such clarity if they didn’t plan on severely reigning in the Chevron deference.
This case concerned an illegal ruling by a government agency. An act of law passed by Congress is another matter.
So even Alito ignores the 2nd amendment.
At the Constitutional level, you cannot infringe. You just can’t. It’s not allowed. No one has the power to diminish this fundamental right.
Unless, of course, congress decided to make a new law. Then it’s OK. Happens all the time.
I see this as a message that Biden can’t use executive orders to further curb 2A without getting Congress to pass a law.
Trump pushed for it.
IOW, Congress needs to do its job of passing laws if it wants this stuff. Not relying on petty-dictator executive orders.
SCOTUS could strike down any rule, but it has to be presented to it. And Alito is basically pointing out that there is unfortunate precedent of Congress making such laws.
Think Roe. As it was, it took 50 years to strike, because it wasn’t really presented properly. A real law unlike these previous rulings and EOs could be harder to strike but still depends mostly on presenting the case.
He also pushed for a tax ‘cut’ that raised my income tax. I’ll be voting for him, anyway.
Me too. I have no choice. Sure as hell not voting for any D.
Because he clearly believes Congress could pass constitutionally valid legislation to amend the NFA and formally classify bump-stocks. There are also significant efforts to amend the “any other weapon” section to prevent sale of firearms like the Shockwave.
WILL ANYONE STEP UP A& TAKE THE MEMBERS OF THE USSC TO A GUN RANGE & DEMONSTRATE THE BUMP STOCK???
AS I UNDERSTAND—_THE BUMP STOCK will ONLY stabilize the gun.
Cannot understand how it will INCREASE the rate of firing.
Alternatively, do professional criminals use them? Or street thugs?
Did previously legal serious shooting competitions ever feature them?
The bump stop issue was never anything but stupid hysteria to beguile the Democrat "base".
The Supreme Court is saying exactly what it should say.
“You want a law....pass one. We are NOT here to write laws”
Yeah? And who are they who answer to the citizens of the USA?
But that issue was not before the Court. If the court can resolve an issue on legislative grounds, it will do so without getting to any underlying constitutional question. The constitutionality of a bumpstock ban can only be addressed if the Congress or a state legislature should enact such a ban.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.